ProjNet Report_14JUN2022.pdf

Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Only

Bid Inquiry Contractor Report All Inquiries

Project: N69450-22-R-0063 Gulf Coast Mini MACC Review: Phase I RFP (00001) (sorted by CommentID ) Displaying 35 inquiries.

Id Discipline Sheet Detail Spec

1670436 Project

Management Section 00 22 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Paragraph E.3.(a)(i)(4) of Section 00 20 00, Page 14 of 54 requires a FAPIIS Certification.

The Certification process is no longer available. Information retrieved is from SAM.gov

Please confirm/verify that the Certification is not available.

On: May 24 2022.

Government Response. . Non-concur. The contractor is still required to ensure FAPIIS certification and information from FAR 52.209-7 is posted in FAPIIS by maintaining an active registration in SAM. On: May 25 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1670867 General RFP pg. 11

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The general building types listed in para. B.2, are industrial, infrastructure, administrative, training, dormitory, and community support facilities but the types listed on the SAM notice also include: aviation and aircraft facilities, marine facilities, warehouses and supply facilities, and security level facilities. Should we assume that this combined list of facility types is representative of the building types that will fall under this MACC?

On: May 25 2022.

Government Response. . The Offeror shall assume the general building type projects for this MACC include those listed in Section 00 22 00, Paragraph I.B.2. of the solicitation. The SAM notice will be updated to reflect the solicitation language. On: May 25 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1671369 Project

Management Section 00 20 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Reference previous Comment ID 1670436

Paragraph E.3.(a)(i)(4) of Section 00 20 00, Page 14 of 54 indicates that a FAPIIS certification is required to be submitted.

At this time, there is no such thing as a FAPIIS certification. When one goes to FAPIIS, the information presented for one is shown on the attached file, FAPIIS info.pdf.

This information is retrieved directly from SAM.gov and there is no way to obtain a FAPIIS certification. If you go to the FAPIIS.gov site and enter a cage code or other , you will see what I am trying to explain. This information is not certified. Will this information be acceptable

(Attachment: FAPIIS_info.pdf) On: May 26 2022.

Government Response. . Yes. As stated in FAR 52.209-7 (d), "The offeor shall post the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (c)(1)(iv) of this provision in FAPIIS as required through maintaining an active registration in the System for Award Management, which can be accessed via https://www.sam.gov (see FAR 52.204-7)." The offeror shall ensure this information is posted in FAPIIS by maintaining an active

Page 1 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

ProjNet: Logged In User registration in SAM. The term "Certification" is deleted and replaced by "active registration." On: Jun 08

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1671414 Other Solicitation

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Reference Solicitation page 14 paragraph (1) Factor 1- Technical Approach (2) it states that the technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided or two (2) single-sided pages including organizational chart. To provide a Technical narrative we need more than one page can the page count be increased to a maximum of 10 pages?

On: May 26 2022.

Government Response. . No, Per Page 14 of 54, Factor 1 Technical Approach, Paragraph (i), subparagraph (2) The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart. The information requested in item #3 below is not included in this page limitation. On: May 31 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1671539 Project

Management 00 20 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The footnote area on Exhibit B, Safety Data Sheet, is extremely large. Can the size of the footnote be reduced or eliminated in its entirety? This will provide more space for safety narrative information.

On: May 26 2022.

Government Response. . No, the footnote area may not be eliminated; however, the size of the footnote can be reduced. Per RFP Page 19 of 54, Factor-3 Safety Technical Approach, Paragraph (i), Subparagraph 3.d. The Technical Approach of Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided pages. On: May 31 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1672173 General Exhibits A-C

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Exhibits A, B, and C: Please provide Exhibits A, B, and C in Word version.

On: May 27 2022.

Government Response. . Word versions of Exhibits A, B, and C have been provided as attachments.

On: Jun 02 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1672175 General Exhibit C

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Exhibit C PPQ: Given that the solicitation is utilizing the reusable PPQ-0 form that is intended to relieve clients from having to complete PPQs for a project more than once, please confirm that if the Offeror and/or design firm has an existing PPQ available for a project that contains substantially the same information, the existing PPQ can be used to document past performance quality.

On: May 27 2022.

Government Response. . No. Exhibit C has been updated and requires additional information from previous editions.

Per Factor 4.i.1, 4.i.2, 4.i.3, If a Final Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for construction experience. If a Final

Page 2 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

ProjNet: Logged In Userhttps://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=Bic...

AE Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it must be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for design experience. If there is not a Final CPARS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Exhibit C) for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience. On: May 31 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1672619 Other Page 14 Factor 1 - Technical

Approach

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Reference Solicitation page 14 paragraph (1) Factor 1- Technical Approach (2) it states that the technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided or two (2) single-sided pages including organizational chart. Can we please get one additional page for this? It is incredibly hard to give the NAVFAC a thorough narrative for the construction company, the A/E, plus an organizational chart in only two pages.

On: May 31 2022.

Government Response. . No. See response to Inquiry ID: 1671414. On: May 31 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1672632 Project

Management Section 00 22 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

On Page 16 of 54 of Section 00 22 00 design/build projects for the Design Experience states that if the design portion of the contract has been completed within the past 5 years, then that project can be submitted as past performance.

It is requested that design/build projects for the Construction Experience include this same language as Design Experience. Our firm has design/build projects where the design is complete and the construction is still in progress.

On: May 31 2022.

Government Response. . No. Per RFP Factor 2.i.1.b, Projects submitted for the Prime Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of issuance of this RFP. Construction and financial closeout constitute completion. Beneficial Occupancy is not considered completion. On: Jun 02 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1672793 Project

Management Exhibit A

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The font size in Exhibit A block is 10. Can the information to be provided in each block be font size 10 also?

Section 00 22 00 indicates that minimum font size is 11.

Font size 10 is necessary to provide all the information required to show that the project is relevant and other.

On: May 31 2022.

Government Response. . No. Per RFP E.3.a.i, Font size is to be Ariel or Times New Roman, point 11 or greater. On: Jun 02 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1673636 General RFI 1672175, Exhibit C

PPQ

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Response to RFI 1672175, Exhibit C PPQ: We respectfully request that the Government reconsider allowing use of existing PPQ-0 forms to respond to past performance. The Exhibit C form included in the solicitation is dated 7 December 2011, so we are uncertain what has changed. Further, at the bottom of the first page of the form, it states, "THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO NAVFAC WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND

Page 3 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON NAVFAC SOLICITATIONS." The allowance for duplication has been part of this form since 2011.

On: Jun 01 2022.

Government Response. . No. See response to RFI 1672175. Offeror shall meet submission requirements. On: Jun 02 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1673829 Other Past Performance requirement

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

We have a project with a contract value greater than $1M and completed within the past five (5) years. Part of this project has an addition/new structure. Please confirm that this project can be submitted to comply with the requirement of including at least one (1) new construction project - per Page 15 of 54 of the Solicitation - "Factor 2-Experience"

(Attachment: Past_performance_requirements.pdf) On: Jun 01 2022.

Government Response. . Insufficient information provided to confirm a yes or no response.

Per RFP Factor 2,i.1 Paragraphs a and b, new construction portion of relevant construction project shall demonstrate Prime Contractor, multidiscipline, construction experience with a contract value of one million ($1,000,000) or greater. Additionally, Projects submitted for the Prime Offeror shall be completed within the past five (5) years of issuance of this RFP. Construction and financial closeout constitute completion.

Beneficial Occupancy is not considered completion.

The cost for the addition/new construction portion of the project would need to be clearly indicated in the Offeror's proposal.

An addition to an existing structure may not rate as favorably as a free-standing structure, depending on the size, scope and complexity of the project. On: Jun 07 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1674097 Project

Management Representations and

Certifications

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

On May 25, 2022, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued Guidance on Inflation and Economic Price Adjustment (EPA). A copy of the Guidance is attached. DOD notes that an EPA clause might be appropriate in contracts since there is serious doubt about the stability of market or labor conditions.

It is requested that Contracting Division review this guidance and strongly consider including an Economic Price Adjustment clause in this solicitation. Contracting should consider the following in this clause.

1. Considerations for selecting an index to measure inflation that is linked to cost components that are most unstable;

2. Limitations on the scope of the EPA to exclude costs that are unlikely to be affected by inflation;

3. Allowance for both upward and downward adjustments in price; and

4. Establishing formulas for calculating the new pricing instead of merely reopening price negotiations.

(Attachment: DOD_Guidance.pdf) On: Jun 02 2022.

Government Response. . No EPA clause will be included in this solicitation. On: Jun 08 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1674121 General Section 00 22 00 Non-price Factors (Phase

One)

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

It is difficult to introduce the prime offeror and present the team in Factor 1 Technical Approach which is limited to 2 pages. May we include a cover letter to the Non-price Factors submittal that introduces our prime contractor entity to the reviewers?

On: Jun 02 2022.

Page 4 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

Government Response. . No, Per RFP Factor 1.i, The composition and management of the firms proposed as the design-build (D/B) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6).

(2) Provide a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities. If the experience of an entity is being claimed in Factor 2, that entity must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart. The information requested in item #3 below is not included in this page limitation.

(3) In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror's team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.). On: Jun 07

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1674176 General P.5 Section 00 21 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Please confirm that a JV between a large and small business does not qualify as a small business unless both entities have entered a SBA-approved mentor-protégé agreement (MPA)?

On: Jun 02 2022.

Government Response. . Please see response to PPI# 1674241 for clarification On: Jun 08 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1674241 General p.5 Section 00 21 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

) Please confirm that a JV between a large and small business does not qualify as a small business unless both entities have entered a SBA-approved mentor-protégé agreement (MPA)? The reasoning is that this project is being solicited under NAICS code 236220, with a size standard of $39.5M. Per 13 CFR § 125.8: "a joint venture... may submit an offer... so long as each concern is small under the size standard" and 13 CFR §121.b.6 "A firm that has an SBA-approved mentor-protégé agreement (MPA)... is not affiliated with its mentor."

On: Jun 02 2022.

Government Response. . A Mentor-Protégé Agreement is approved by the Small Business Administration as long as the Protégé is a Small Business. Any other teaming agreement such as Joint Venture or partnership must include a signed agreement between the parties forming the teaming agreement that identifies each company. Each party must meet the Small Business threshold identified in the NAICS code 236220 and size standard of $39.5M On: Jun 08 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1674804 General Section 00 22 00

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

One of the notes in the instructions for Factor 1 says "If the experience of an entity other than the Offeror is being claimed in Factor 2, (i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements, (1) Construction Experience, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or approved mentor protégé agreement (MPA). A letter of commitment is not acceptable." Does this requirement apply to offerors that are utilizing

Page 5 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User experience information from sister companies (i.e., subsidiary firms that share a parent and that are managed by the same president and leadership team) that would provide meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract?

On: Jun 05 2022.

Government Response. . Yes. Refer to RFP Factor 1,i.3, In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror's team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.). On: Jun 07

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1674896 General Section 00 22 10

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The instructions for the Phase One Submission Requirements volume say "if a Representation or Certification required by Section 00 45 00 of the RFP is not provided in SAM, include the representation or certification in your price proposal." Is it correct to assume that no representations or certifications are required in the Phase One Submission Requirements volume because they would be included in the Phase Two price proposal?

On: Jun 06 2022.

Government Response. . No. Representations and Certifications are required as part of the Phase One Submission Requirements. Refer to Phase One Submission Requirements (RFP Pages 13-14, Item #3(a)(i) (3)). On: Jun 08 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1675454 General Proposal Requirements

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Submission requirements state needing a FAPIIS Certification. Are we required to provide a copy of our FAPIIS certification in this proposal or can we provide a letter head stating we have it?

On: Jun 07 2022.

Government Response. . Either is acceptable. On: Jun 08 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1675455 General Proposal Requirements

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

It is stated that it is required to submit the Safety Data Sheet attachment with the narrative on the same sheet.

However it says a 2 page limit and there are 3 pages. Can you confirm if we must submit our answers for the narrative on the attachment or can we provide TCR Rate/DART rate on this and provide answers to safety questions on a seperate sheet? This would remain 2 pages only unless the limit of pages changes.

On: Jun 07 2022.

Government Response. . Per RFP Factor 3.i.3.d, The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page. Exhibit B Page 1 is the Safety Data Sheet. Exhibit B Pages 2 and 3 is the Safety Narrative which is limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page. On: Jun 07

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1675456 General Proposal Requirements

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Would you consider extending the page count on Factor 1:Technical Approach?

Page 6 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

On: Jun 07 2022.

Government Response. . No. See response to Inquiry ID: 1671414. On: Jun 07 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1675904 General General

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Would the Govnerment please consider projects with an Interim CPARS with a 80% Complete Construction?

On: Jun 08 2022.

Government Response. . No.

Per RFP Factor 4.i.7, Final CPARS refers to a Final Evaluation marked 100%, complete, signed by the Contractor Representative, and finalized by the Reviewing Official (if required). Final CPARs or PPQs shall represent Final Construction (Beneficial Occupancy is not considered completion.) or Final Design (accepted Final Design), respectively.

Additionally, Per RFP Factor 4.ii.5, Interim CPARs for the proposed primary construction firm(s) and primary design firm(s) are not acceptable. On: Jun 08 2022

Government Response. . No.

Per RFP Factor 4.i.7, Final CPARS refers to a Final Evaluation marked 100%, complete, signed by the Contractor Representative, and finalized by the Reviewing Official (if required). Final CPARs or PPQs shall represent Final Construction (Beneficial Occupancy is not considered completion.) or Final Design (accepted Final Design), respectively.

Additionally, Per RFP Factor 4.ii.5, Interim CPARs for the proposed primary construction firm(s) and primary design firm(s) are not acceptable. On: Jun 08 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1675913 General General

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

For the Bonding Submission requirement, can the Government please confirm that a statement of assurance concerning our bonding capacity of at least $10< and the ability to bond multiple projects is sufficient? Or would the Government prefer a Letter from our Surety? Or is Bid Bond required?

On: Jun 08 2022.

Government Response. . A bid bond is not a submission requirement for Phase One. As stated in the Submission Requirements (Phase One), Item 3(a)(i)(2), Offeror shall confirm that it has a single award bonding capacity of at least $10,000,000 and the ability to bond multiple projects. A letter from the surety or a confirmation statement from the offeror are both sufficient. On: Jun 09 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1676096 Other NA NA NA

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Our team has experienced a delay in getting our JV registered in SAM. Can the due date be extended?

On: Jun 08 2022.

Government Response. . No, the due date remains 22 JUN 2022. On: Jun 09 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1676127 Other Solicitation RFP Section 00 21 00 & Section

00 22 00 Page 9, FAR 52.228-1& III.

Evaluation

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

In Section 00 21 00, page 9, FAR 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee states offerors are to provide a bid guarantee of 20% of the bid price or $3,000,000. In Section 00 22 00, III. Evaluation, Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for

Page 7 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

Each Factor, bullet 2 states "Offeror shall confirm that it has a single award bonding capacity of at least $10,000,000 and the ability to bond multiple projects. Can the government clarify if the bonding capacity letter of $10,000,000 is for the Phase 1 submission and the Bid Guarantee information will be relevant to the Phase 2 submission?

On: Jun 08 2022.

Government Response. . Confirmed. The bonding capacity letter is a submission requirement for Phase One and the Bid Guarantee is not required until Phase Two. On: Jun 09 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1676557 Other RFP Submission Requirements

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Will the Government allow for graphics and charts to be a smaller point font as long as it is legible?

On: Jun 09 2022.

Government Response. . No. Per RFP E.3.a.i, Font size is to be Ariel or Times New Roman, point 11 or greater. On: Jun 09 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1676627 Project

Management Page 16 2 Design Experience

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

We team with multiple A/Es to manage their work load. Can we submit more than one A/E if we maintain the same page count? If yes, do they still need to submit 5 projects apiece or do they need to submit 5 total between the two?

On: Jun 09 2022.

Government Response. . Per RFP Factor 2.i.2, The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor. Offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined. On: Jun 09 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1676729 General General General

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Will the Government please consider using previously submitted PPQs from clients?

On: Jun 09 2022.

Government Response. . No. See response to Inquiry ID: 1672175. On: Jun 10 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1677175 Other FAR Clause

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Construction material costs have increased significantly in recent times, and the construction material market continues to be volatile and unpredictable. It is anticipated that construction material costs will continue to increase into the foreseeable future; however, it is not possible to predict how much prices will increase by the time the IDIQ is awarded, the design effort is complete (if D-B), and construction commences. To protect both the Government and the Contractor, would the Government consider incorporating FAR 52.216-4 Economic Price Adjustment-Labor and Material or a substantially similar and suitable price adjustment clause in the solicitation documents and resulting task order(s) to allow for an adjustment to the FFP in the event of significant and unpredictable material costs fluctuation during the term of the IDIQ contract? Inclusion of this clause will protect and benefit the Government because the offered prices will not need to account for the elevated risk of unknown future material cost escalations."

On: Jun 10 2022.

Page 8 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

Government Response. . No. See response to Inquiry ID# 1674097. FAR 52.216-4 will not be incorporated into this solicitation. On: Jun 10 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1677436 Project

Management Page 21 Factor 4 - Past Performance

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The government is sending us completed PPQs that have been signed with E signatures. As part of the authenticity security measures of the E signature, the signature and accompanying stamp disappears when I move it from my email to the document that we intend on submitting. All other information stays. Will you all accept the PPQ if the E signature is not appearing?

On: Jun 10 2022.

Government Response. . No. Per Factor 4, ii, Missing data including but not limited to completed PPQs and CPARS are considered a deficiency. On: Jun 13 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1678109 General p.22 Factor 4 - Past Performance

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

It is clear from the current questions on Projnet that if PPQ's are used for past performance from the prime contractor, they are to be on the new Exhibit C provided in this solicitation; however, it is not clear if this also applies to the DOR's past performance. It is much more difficult for DOR's who are in design-build projects with prime contractors to get PPQ's directly from the Government. For DOR past performance, would the government consider accepting PPQ's from previous projects?

On: Jun 11 2022.

Government Response. . No. Offeror must utilize Exhibit C for both Offeror and Designer of Record. Per Factor 4.i,

2. If a Final AE Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it must be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for design experience.

3. If there is not a Final CPARS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Exhibit C) for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience. On: Jun 13

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1678110 General p.22 Factor 4 - Past Performance

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

Solicitation Page 22 of 54, item 2 at the top of the page states: "A CPARS or PPQ for the Prime Contractor is not acceptable for Design Past Performance. Additionally, A PPQ for the designer of record filled out by the Prime Contractor is not acceptable" For projects where the DOR was working with a prime contractor in an design-build and not directly for the government on a design contract, it can be very difficult for the DOR to obtain CPARS directly from the government, especially on projects that are 4-5 years old. Would the government consider allowing CPARS for the overall project or PPQ completed by the prime contractor the DOR worked for rather than requiring them to be on a new PPQ form from the Government?

On: Jun 11 2022.

Government Response. . No. Per RFP Factor 4.ii,

2. A CPARS or PPQ for the Prime Contractor is not acceptable for Design Past Performance.

Additionally, A PPQ for the designer of record filled out by the Prime Contractor is not acceptable.

3. CPARS and PPQs for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience shall be filled out by the project client. CPARS and PPQs for each project included in Factor 2 for Design Experience shall address Design Performance.

Page 9 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User

4. If the offer was both the Designer of Record and Prime Contractor on a sole source Design-build project, a Final CPARS and/or Final PPQ (if a CPARS is not available) completed by the project client addressing Construction Past Performance for the Offeror must be provided. Additionally a separate Final CPARS and/or Final PPQ (if a CPARS is not available) completed by the project client addressing Design Past Performance for the design of record must be provided. On: Jun 13 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1678133 General Proposal Submission

Instructions A. Phase One Information included with submission requirements

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The RFP does not specify where the POC and company information listed on page 6 of the RFP should be included.

Does the Government want a cover letter to the Submission Requirements file? Or should the first page of Submission Requirements file provide this information? Should this information also be included in Non-Price Factors file as either a cover letter or the first page?

On: Jun 11 2022.

Government Response. . It is up to the offeror(s) how they would like to provide the POC and company info as detailed on Page 6 of the RFP (Proposal Submission Requirements, A. Phase One), as long as it is submitted as part of their Phase One submission requirements proposal/file. It is not required to be submitted with the Phase One non-price factors proposal/file. On: Jun 13 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1678134 General Factor 1 Technical

Approach E3.(b) (1)(i)(2) Organizational Chart

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

The RFP requires the organizational chart to be included in the two-page limit that also includes the Offeror's technical approach and roles and responsibilities narratives. The organizational chart itself requires one page. In order to sufficiently describe our proposed technical approach and roles and responsibilities on the contract and present an organizational chart, please exclude the organizational chart from the two-page limit or increase the page count for Factor 1 to three pages.

On: Jun 11 2022.

Government Response. . No. See response to Inquiry ID: 1671414. On: Jun 13 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

1678145 General Page 15 Factor 2 - Experience

Comment Classification: Public (Public)

In Evaluation for Award, Factor 2 Experience, there are listed 9 unique features (a-i) that will be considered more favorably. Are any of these 9 features considered of higher priority or required to be considered relevant?

On: Jun 11 2022.

Government Response. . No. On: Jun 13 2022

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

Report Complete

Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Only Patent 11/892,984 ProjNet property of ERDC since 2004.

Page 10 of 10ProjNet: Logged In User